Big day for Evangelical rapists

[Loki]

More brazen judicial activism from the GOP-appointed members of the Court (minus Gorsuch). No regard for precedent, treaties, or Oklahoma's own constitution.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-...oma-2022-06-29

[Lewkowski]

This could have been avoided if the DOJ did its job and prosecuted scum bags.

[Loki]

That's not how the Constitution works.

[LittleFuzzy]

That's not how the Constitution works.

It is under this Court. How else can states be allowed to prosecute those who break their laws elsewhere, like those on healthcare holidays seeking abortions? It can't matter if a crime occurred within their jurisdiction or not, or anyone could just go somewhere else to commit their crime and get away with it.

[Loki]

This court is about one step away from allowing legislatures to void federal election results.

[Aimless]

This court is about one step away from allowing legislatures to void federal election results.

Are there any countermeasures available to the parts of the union that aren't crooked beyond salvation?

[Loki]

What can anyone do at that point? They can refuse to accept these election results, but you know whose side the Supreme Court will take.

[Steely Glint]

Twitter Link

What the fuck is wrong with these people?

They're either colluding or outright delusional/incompetent at this point. Like, straight up living in a fantasy world.

[Loki]

Obama ran as a radical and failed to bring radical change. You expect too much of Biden (assuming he had the votes, which is doubtful).

[LittleFuzzy]

There's only one "fix" that stays within the the current framework, packing the Court, and that's just hospice care because once the Dems do it, the GOP will just pack it further as soon as they're in office. It's not a solution and it's not going to really help. It's a palliative that will make things a little better for 2-8 years, then much worse after with the possible silver lining that it will accelerate things getting worse so much that it will usher in collapse and consequent real reform sooner. Any other solution is going to take substantially longer than the next mid-term elections to develop and implement so they're better off waiting unless they can develop a solid plan to present and campaign with.

Now it is a further total failure on the Dems part that they don't have one now, after having been warned what direction the Court was going. . .

[Steely Glint]

You expect too much of Biden (assuming he had the votes, which is doubtful).

No, this is more or less exactly what I expected of Biden. It's just infuriating to see to play out in real time.

[Lewkowski]

There's only one "fix" that stays within the the current framework, packing the Court, and that's just hospice care because once the Dems do it, the GOP will just pack it further as soon as they're in office. It's not a solution and it's not going to really help. It's a palliative that will make things a little better for 2-8 years, then much worse after with the possible silver lining that it will accelerate things getting worse so much that it will usher in collapse and consequent real reform sooner. Any other solution is going to take substantially longer than the next mid-term elections to develop and implement so they're better off waiting unless they can develop a solid plan to present and campaign with.

Now it is a further total failure on the Dems part that they don't have one now, after having been warned what direction the Court was going. . .

Oh ffs lol, the court didn't declare abortion illegal across 50 states all t hey did was return the power to individual state legislatures. You want abortions allowed, vote in state reps who will do it.

[Loki]

Would that be before or after they gerrymander their own districts so heavily that <50% of the vote leads to 2/3 of the seats?

[LittleFuzzy]

Oh ffs lol, the court didn't declare abortion illegal across 50 states

Not a justiciable controversy before the courts at the time. As I've already said, they won't have their chance to do that until a GOP voted in on the basis of a stagflating economy passes the federal law banning it across all 50 states two or three years from now.

You want abortions allowed, vote in state reps who will do it.

Can't do that either, with the way they've been gerrymandering themselves into legislative supermajorities on the basis of minority popular votes and voter suppression.

[Lewkowski]

Voter suppression? lol

https://www.census.gov/library/stori...-election.html

[Hazir]

Not a justiciable controversy before the courts at the time. As I've already said, they won't have their chance to do that until a GOP voted in on the basis of a stagflating economy passes the federal law banning it across all 50 states two or three years from now.



Can't do that either, with the way they've been gerrymandering themselves into legislative supermajorities on the basis of minority popular votes and voter suppression.

Isn't it a bit contradictory to assume that federal legislation is possible when the power to legislate is presumably with the states? Wasn't the whole pretense for the ruling that a constitutional basis was lacking for abortion as a right on the basis of Roe vs Wade?

[LittleFuzzy]

Isn't it a bit contradictory to assume that federal legislation is possible when the power to legislate is presumably with the states? Wasn't the whole pretense for the ruling that a constitutional basis was lacking for abortion as a right on the basis of Roe vs Wade?

More than a bit contradictory, absolutely. But they were being very carefully selective in drawing on their own past opinions to justify overturning Roe now, picking and choosing from the parts that could be used and ignoring their past words which spoke about jurisprudential principles that would get in the way now. You'll note there wasn't a terrible degree of focus on states rights, for instance, even though that was one of the classic hallmarks of their dissents in the past. They wanted to start banning abortion (and Thomas wants to get rid of the entirety of substantive due process) and they made it happen.

They'll come up with some rationale that preventing a ban on abortion intrudes on states rights if they have to, but declare that banning it, even if a state disagrees, speaks to a rational state interest and constitutional use of federal power. But I'm sure they'd prefer to sidestep and never have to address federal legislation preventing bans in the first place.

[Hazir]

Yes, I did notice that 'not rooted' nonsense of course. But without state rights, this circle couldn't have been squared. It's what's needed to pull in people like Dread who care more about process than about what's simply the right thing to do.

I personally am against abortion. I also think that this opinion is irrelevant as I am male and will never face the condition of having to consider the consequences of a pregnancy for my body.

[Hazir]

Yes, I did notice that 'not rooted' nonsense of course. But without state rights, this circle couldn't have been squared. It's what's needed to pull in people like Dread who care more about process than about what's simply the right thing to do.

I personally am against abortion. I also think that this opinion is irrelevant as I am male and will never face the condition of having to consider the consequences of a pregnancy for my body.

[Aimless]

Reports coming in from various Taliban states abt people not being able to refill their methotrexate prescriptions. Backward ass country.

[Hazir]

Reports coming in from various Taliban states abt people not being able to refill their methotrexate prescriptions. Backward ass country.

That's kind of a stretch, to reduce the medication's effects to one of its side effects. But I can see how people would be afraid of being charged with abortion in case of a miscarriage.

[Ominous Gamer]

Also what incentivization? You are imagining it happening as if the coach is going to penalize players for not doing it be the assumption that since he could he would. Absent proof of that, it shouldn't be an issue.

I was a Katy High football co-captain and we were pressured into prayer

[Lewkowski]

So an example from 15+ years ago in a different school :0

[Aimless]

Big day for pro-rapist media

Twitter Link

[LittleFuzzy]

So an example from 15+ years ago in a different school :0

So every individual act is constitutional until proven guilty at the Supreme level? Excellent. We should start rounding up all the guns right now. Sure, some of them will have to be returned after a couple of years of litigation but think about all the guns we can take out of circulation in the meantime, or permanently because people can't afford those years of lawyers and give up before proving the seizure was unconstitutional at a high enough level. And those that are returned can just be seized again immediately to start the process over again, right Lewk?

[Aimless]

Republican men are so stupid it almost hurts:

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/15/11116...document-shows

[Lewkowski]

So every individual act is constitutional until proven guilty at the Supreme level? Excellent. We should start rounding up all the guns right now. Sure, some of them will have to be returned after a couple of years of litigation but think about all the guns we can take out of circulation in the meantime, or permanently because people can't afford those years of lawyers and give up before proving the seizure was unconstitutional at a high enough level. And those that are returned can just be seized again immediately to start the process over again, right Lewk?

Don't be silly. A case should be taken on its merits. The idea that because a coach *might* abuse their authority we should ban any religious expression is absurd. What's next a female Muslim coach wears a hijab to work and people will say its pressuring her players to also wear one?

[Lewkowski]

Republican men are so stupid it almost hurts:

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/15/11116...document-shows

This story is still a bit odd.

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/...d/65373626007/

Bernard filed the required abortion disclosure, known as a "terminated pregnancy" form, on July 2, two days after she performed the girl's abortion, according to a copy of the form IndyStar received Thursday from the state health department. State law requires the forms to be filed within three days for patients under age 16.

The form shows Bernard indicated the girl was seeking an abortion as a result of being abused.

Kathleen Delaney, an attorney for Bernard, said in a statement that her client "took every appropriate and proper action in accordance with the law and both her medical and ethical training as a physician."

"She followed all relevant policies, procedures, and regulations in this case, just as she does every day to provide the best possible care for her patients," Delaney said. "She has not violated any law, including patient privacy laws, and she has not been disciplined by her employer. We are considering legal action against those who have smeared my client, including Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, and know that the facts will all come out in due time.”

Columbus, Ohio, police said they were made aware of the girl's rape on June 22 through a referral by Franklin County Children Services that was made by her mother. Bernard has said she was contacted about the abortion five days later on June 27.

The abortion took place on June 30, just six days after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The high court's decision allowed an Ohio law to go into effect restricting abortions after fetal cardiac activity is detected, which is typically around 6 weeks.

The form Bernard filed with the state shows the girl was 6 weeks pregnant at the time of her abortion.

The form indicates the doctor did not know the age of the "father." In such cases, doctors are required to enter an "approximate age," according to a person familiar with the electronic filing system. Bernard entered "17."

IndyStar obtained copies of all pregnancy termination forms submitted to the state health department from June 24, the day of the U.S. Supreme Court decision, to July 11, 2022. The 10-year-old victim is among seven patients younger than 18 who received abortion care in Indiana during the time period. She's also the youngest to receive care, and the only juvenile whose abortion was listed as the result of abuse, according to the documents.

All told, Indiana doctors reported performing 144 abortions in the time period. That doesn't necessarily capture all of the abortions performed during that time period, because the state gives doctors 30 days to submit the forms when the patient is 16 or older.

Timeline

June 22: Police in Columbus, Ohio, are made aware of the girl's rape through a referral by Franklin County Children Services that was made by her mother, according to police.

June 24: U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. An Ohio law restricting abortions when fetal cardiac activity is detectable goes into effect.

June 27: Bernard receives call from a child abuse doctor in Ohio seeking an abortion for a 10-year-old who had been raped, according to what Bernard previously told IndyStar.

June 30: Abortion is performed.

July 2: Bernard files the required "terminated pregnancy form" with the Indiana Department of Health and the Department of Children Services.
"

I have questions. Was the 'father' with the girl when they took her to get an abortion? Who said the father was 17? The doctor put the age of the father as 17 on her official report to the state but take one look at the rapist POS and you can tell he's an adult not a 17 year old. Ultimately an AG saying they are investigating a matter isn't a witch hunt. Its pretty damn important all relevant information be reviewed properly when we are talking about a child rape scenario.

[LittleFuzzy]

Don't be silly. A case should be taken on its merits. The idea that because a coach *might* abuse their authority we should ban any religious expression is absurd. What's next a female Muslim coach wears a hijab to work and people will say its pressuring her players to also wear one?

And I'm proposing sweeping gun seizures that must properly be dealt with the same way, on their individual merits, with no regard for precedent or generally applicable rules or prior rulings.

[Aimless]

Twitter Link

I mean everyone told him before he voted for the bill but I guess he deserves some cred for openly admitting to being a callous halfwit.